[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MULTI_LIB vs. libtool: who will win
From: |
Robert Boehne |
Subject: |
Re: MULTI_LIB vs. libtool: who will win |
Date: |
Mon, 01 Oct 2001 11:04:06 -0500 |
Marc:
Bruce Korb is currently looking into adding multilib support to Libtool,
and it sounds like you're running into exactly the problems he's
hoping to fix. ;) I'm not sure where he is in the process,
so perhaps he can chime in.
Cheers!
Robert
Marc Espie wrote:
>
> I've been busy fixing the various pieces of shared libraries under OpenBSD.
> Right now, I suspect I've hit yet another brick-wall.
>
> For various reasons, some architectures need to be multi-libbed with fpic
> (we do need a libgcc compiled with fpic for shared libraries, but at the
> same time, we also need a libgcc compiled without fpic because of some
> weird interaction with gdb, and well, we also like it for compiling static
> binaries).
>
> However, libtool knows nothing about that. So right now, I have a
> multi-libbed gcc-3.0.1 that builds libstdc++.so AND fpic/libstdc++.so
> Ludicrous...
>
> The remaining problem is that it does seem that libjava doesn't expect
> the spanish inquisition... err... the multi-libbing, and fails abysmally
> in the fpic part.
>
> So, one or two questions:
> - anyone got a multi-libbed target where libjava works in 3.0.1 ?
> - is there a simple way to fix the multi-libbing process ? I really want
> to have -fpic static archives, and shared libraries, but emphatically NOT
> build libstdc++.so TWICE because of it.
--
Robert Boehne Software Engineer
Ricardo Software Chicago Technical Center
TEL: (630)789-0003 x. 238
FAX: (630)789-0127
email: address@hidden
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: MULTI_LIB vs. libtool: who will win,
Robert Boehne <=